ILNews

Opinions Jan. 25, 2012

January 25, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Indiana Court of Appeals
Timothy Long v. State of Indiana
49A02-1105-CR-381
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated and being a habitual substance offender. Because the master commissioner presided at Long’s guilty plea hearing, and not at a criminal trial, she did not have the authority to enter a final judgment on Long’s sentence. Marion Superior Judge Linda Brown did not err by rejecting the master commissioner’s sentence and imposing her own sentence.

Natalie E. Murrell v. State of Indiana
67A01-1106-CR-251
Criminal. The trial court did not err by rejecting Murrell’s defense of duress. Murrell’s Class C felony conviction of attempting to provide cellular telephones to an inmate does not violate the proportionality clause of the Indiana Constitution. Remands with instructions for the trial court to correct its written sentencing order to impose concurrent sentences.

Kevin Walsh v. Chris Sweeney Construction, Inc. (NFP)
17A05-1107-PL-370
Civil plenary. Affirms order foreclosing Chris Sweeney Construction’s mechanic’s lien on Walsh’s home, awarding Sweeny Construction unjust enrichment damages for unpaid labor services and attorney fees and denying Walsh’s counterclaims. Remands for correction of scrivener’s error.

Anthony Earl Coakley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1107-CR-358
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Michael D. Perkinson, Jr. v. Kay Char Perkinson (NFP)
36A05-1106-DR-322
Domestic relation. Reverses denial of motion to correct error that challenged the trial court order denying Perkinson Jr.’s verified petition for modification of parenting time and support. Remands for further proceedings.

Jeremiah L. Hancock v. State of Indiana (NFP)
47A01-1104-CR-201
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to murder.

Jennifer Hutchens v. Gregory Sausaman (NFP)
43A04-1107-DR-395
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting custody of Hutchens’ daughter to Sausaman. Denies Sausaman’s request for appellate attorney fees.

Ryan N. Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1104-CR-378
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea to Class A felony child molesting.

Kenneth W. Gibbs v. Indiana Parole Board (NFP)
52A04-1106-MI-378
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of Gibbs’ petition for mandate requiring the Indiana Parole Board to determine his parole eligibility based on a vote of all five board members.

Ellettsville Holdings, LLC v. Garnett D. Kinser (NFP)
53A04-1103-PL-121
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of Kinser on Ellettsville Holdings’ complaint for damages based upon claims of breach of the parties’ purchase agreement and breach of warranty.

Jameson Curry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1104-CR-175
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting, but remands for sentence modification pursuant to Appellate Rule 7(B).

James Roby v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A05-1106-CR-302
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of cocaine.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of K.V., and Q.M.S. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1105-JT-535
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Anthony P. Wamue v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1106-CR-293
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Dwayne Burnett v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Opportunity Enterprises, Inc. (NFP)
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2012/january/01251207jsk.pdf
93A02-1106-EX-607
Agency appeal. Affirms finding that Burnett is disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT